Monthly Archives: January 2014

As we enter 2014, it’s important to remember all those we’ve lost in the year before. One death, specifically, weighs on all our hearts and minds. readme is, of course, speaking of the tragic and unexpected passing of the institution of marriage. That’s right, folks. Marriage died in 2013. Not that you’d know from listening to the lamestream liberal media. Thankfully, we have Keith Ablow to tell us what’s what.

A psychiatrist and member of the ‘Fox News Medical A-Team’ (catchphrase: “I love it when a health plan comes together”), Dr. Keith Ablow broke the news in the most level-headed and professional manner possible, with a not-at-all melodramatic statement that “marriage is over”. According to sources, he then started painting his nails black and muttering about how ‘Linkin Park’s the only one who understands’.

Ablow of course had numerous pieces of evidence to support his ‘dead marriage’ theory, and by ‘numerous’, we mean ‘one’. As he points out, sometimes celebrities have really short marriages, and this is undeniably the result of marriage being dead. Because short celebrity marriages are a thing totally specific to 2013, and not something celebrities have been doing for decades before now. But it’s not like evidence is an important part of the scientific process or anyone. No, what’s more important is Ablow making sure people know that he totally called it.

“More than a year ago, when states began to legalize gay marriage, I argued that polygamy would be the natural result,” Ablow said. “Now one District Court Judge in Utah thinks that parts of a single anti-polygamy law are unconstitutional, so I’m going to consider my point irrefutably proved.” And since the man is clearly a better prophet than Nostradamus, he followed up with some more crazy blanket generalizations, asserting that gay marriage will lead to marriage becoming “the Wild West” and incest being legalized.

“I don’t care! You’re not my real dad!” Ablow shouted in response, throwing his eyeliner at readme. “Marriage is a joke! Everybody should just take the government out of the equation altogether! Get gay-polygamy-married at a commune for all I care! I’m going to write a moody poem about it on my LiveJournal! Then you’ll be sorry!”

Being a decent person and selfies are among the new Pope’s 21st century exploits.

In a move that rattled his staunchest followers, Pope Francis responded to criticism by threatening to modernize the church, stating, “I’ll do it, don’t push me or by God I’ll drag the whole church into the 21st century.” Conservatives worldwide have condemned this brinkmanship, claiming that Francis is just whining to get what he wants, and that his position of the Pope, spiritual leader to over one billion Catholics and imbued with papal infallibility, gives him an unfair advantage.

In a my-way-or-the-highway move, Pope Francis is attempting to silence critics with his holy forces. One such critic is Home Depot founder Ken Langone. Langone, a wealthy Catholic donor, claims that an “anonymous” seven-figure donation to a Catholic hospital has been put on hold indefinitely because of the Pope’s comments promoting the importance of the rich’s responsibility to the poor. Like small children, Langone argued, the rich tend to do the exact opposite as what they’re told. Hope remains for rich outside the United States, however, because “rich people in one country don’t act the same as rich people in another country,” according to Langone.

The Pope’s threat to modernize may also be partially in response to the new Spanish Cardinal, Fernando Sebastion, who claimed homosexuality is a defect, like his high blood pressure, and that it can be “cured” with the right treatment. Can you pray the high blood pressure away, too? That might help invigorate church membership among the adult population.

When he heard of the issue Pope Francis responded with surprise. “Don’t these people realize that I am the direct line to God? Why are they questioning my authority? I said be nice to the gays and the poor, is it really that hard? I still have contraceptives and women’s rights if I really want to freak people out.”

In June of 2013, sixteen-year-old driver Ethan Couch swerved off the road while drunk and hit a group of nearby pedestrians, killing four and injuring two others. Ordinarily, this might result in a maximum of twenty years in jail for vehicular manslaughter, but the defense attorney was able to argue this down to ten years of probation and a year of on the grounds that his client was too rich to know better. No, seriously.

According to the attorney, Couch suffered from a condition called ‘affluenza’, which prevented him from understanding “[the] rational link between behavior and consequences”. Because his parents were too rich to guide him properly during adolescence, the attorney argued, Couch was never taught basic human decency and thus could not be expected to understand that getting drunk and killing people was actually a bad thing. And truly, the name ‘affluenza’ is fitting, because lack of parental guidance is a problem faced only by the wealthy. It’s not as though parents in lower-income families might ever not have the time to impart life lessons upon their children, especially not because they might, say, spend most of their time working multiple jobs in order to support said children. No, this excuse is one that only rich kids can claim.

Given the evidence, however, District Judge Jean Boyd saw no choice but to rule against sending Couch to prison because it simply wouldn’t give him the therapy he needed, and that the best way to teach him that his actions have consequences is to eliminate any consequence he might have faced for his actions. And, in fact, Boyd has said would give all families, regardless of their level of income, the option of paying $450,000 out of pocket to send their children to rehab instead of jail as Couch’s parents did. So it’s not like anyone can call her biased or anything.

The ‘affluenza defense’ has, for some reason, caused ire among pretty much everyone who is not themselves fabulously wealthy, calling it another excuse for the rich to avoid responsibility. But can’t they see how hard it is for its sufferers? You keep having to explain to people you can’t be held accountable for things, because other people in the past made the horrendous mistake of listening to you when you told them you can’t be held accountable for things! It’s a vicious cycle, to be sure. Oh, if only there were some way to cure the rich of this horrible affliction and allow them to actually be held responsible for crimes they commit. But how?

Seventeen states now recognize same-sex marriages, and Ohio may be the next. Judge Timothy Black recently ruled that not allowing couples married in other states their death certificates was unconstitutional.

“The question presented,” wrote Black, “is whether a state can do what the federal government cannot – i.e., discriminate against same-sex couples – simply because the majority of the voters don’t like homosexuality (or at least didn’t in 2004).”

In response to the outrageous idea that grieving gay people get to see their spouses, Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine proclaimed that he would “defend the Ohio Constitution and state statutes.”

Ohio’s constitutional ban on gay marriage was set in 2004, because of the danger gay marriage posed to traditional marriage. Black’s case applied specifically the the rights of married gay couples to be recognized as gay–we mean married–on their death certificates. Recognizing these dangerous individuals would open the door to other forms of sexual and social deviancy, like crying over dead people. Recognition of marriage on death certificates is responsible for allowing normal couples access to their spouse’s bank accounts, health insurance, alongside the implicit value of having been “til death do us part”. Allowing gay people to have money and health insurance could be even more disastrous as is might cause certain undesirable parts of the economy to boom, such as “Biff’s Sodomy Closet”. It would also allow trans people in queer couples to obtain medical assistance in their transition through their corrupt and dead partner’s health insurance. Oh wait, no it wouldn’t.

Death certificates are often a necessary evil for normal couples, and can be a pain to deal with in the midst of grief, since they are necessary to prove your loved one’s death to various institutions like banks or hospitals.

“Really”, continued DeWine, “We’re probably doing them a favour. They don’t have to deal with the death certificate on top of trying to save their mortal souls”.

Pictured: Stockholm [top] and Carnegie Mellon [bottom], see the similarity?

January 12th, 2014, a snowy CMU campus shows signs of life under its hardened coat. Students laugh and chatter in the distance, a bright noise that floats down dorm halls and flits playfully from between the UC’s pillars. It is a scene that would have been unheard of just three weeks prior, during Finals Week. In those bleak and (strangely) warmer times, embattled students emerged from their caves only to shotgun coffees and stare across the Cut, dreaming of a day they would touch ragged foot and suitcase wheel to the sidewalk on the other side.

Yet when readme returned to campus on the 11th, it found itself in the midst of a completely different CMU than it had left. As it scoured the walks and libraries for the latest scoop, a strange trend emerged among the natives; people seemed… upbeat. readme’s suspicions were confirmed later that day when the Tartan failed to reject its daily marriage proposal (rolling your eyes is like a soft “maybe”, right?). Even in light of the happy news, something had obviously gone horribly wrong in CMU. It was up to readme to find out exactly what that was and mend the situation if possible. readme turned to head scientist and resident pop psychologist John J.J. Schmidt for answers.

“This is slowly turning into an obvious case of Stockholm Syndrome.” John Schmidt revealed to readme as they settled down in his office for hard boiled eggs. And what exactly did that mean?

“It’s the phenomenon where victims start to feel some sort of empathy for their captors and in some extreme cases even start to side with their captors,” John explained, picking egg shells out of his teeth, “The term was coined in Stockholm, Sweden, when the hostages of a bank robbery spent so much time with their captors that refused help from the police at one point. And you can definitely see the parallels in this situation.”

So what could readme possibly do for CMU students? How could an entire campus possibly be cured of Stockholm Syndrome on such a rampant level?

“What? The students?” John said, “No, CMU students are fine. It’s the post-break second wind. I’m talking about you and the Tartan. You gotta leave the poor woman alone.”

On January 14, 2014, a federal circuit court struck down the FCC’s claims authority over enforcing Net Neutrality policies. In ensuing outcry, two things became clear. Firstly, many were disturbed by the implication that private companies would have even more behind-the-scenes control over their Internet content and usage, and further disturbed by the threat that companies would be able to demand “tolls” for quality service, essentially choking off competition and innovation in the business. Secondly – aw man they’re going to fuck with Netflix? Please, no.

To discuss these matters, readme once again brought in head scientist and resident I.T. service representative John J.J. Schmidt. Schmidt is a Computers Professional with a Masters in Windows 8 Usage and co-edits his own comments section on CNET. “Oh boo hoo,” he began, “Net neutrality, schmidt schrutality. Everyone is getting worked up over nothing. I mean, think about it. Without net neutrality, all these companies will have that much more money from [choking off competition and innovation] and that’s great. What else would companies do with a lot of money but put it right back into their services and increase broadband access for their consumers.”

Schmidt, of course, raised a good point. Those doubting the ability of private companies to control themselves in the face of extremely limited competition and tons of legal gray areas need look no further than the shining beacon of Comcast to assuage their disbelief. Despite being U.S.’s largest home internet provider and cable company, Comcast has kept its heart in customer care, ensuring that their profits go toward the lowest possible rates for the fastest services.

Hello, reader! Do you like readme? Would you like to keep reading delicious satire news for the rest of your college career? If so, then it may sadden you to know that your readme-filled college future is currently in jeopardy. You may not be aware of this, dear reader, but scathing articles about the government’s handling of women’s issues do not just simply spring forth from the ether (readme’s research into spontaneous satireogenesis has had similarly fruitless results). No, in order to have satire, there must be someone ready to write the satire. And that, dear reader, is where you come in.

You know that big list on the back of the readme where we name the dozens of writers who make readme possible? LIES. ALL LIES. The truth is, said list is not so much a list of who is writing for readme as much as it is a list of those who did, at some point, do so. Much like the best way to survive a bear attack is to make yourself look bigger than you are (ed: it turns out this is not, in fact, always the best way to survive a bear attack), a biweekly satire paper’s only defense against predatory newsgroups is to pad out the size of its writing staff. We realize, though, that this may have led some of you to the conclusion that readme is far more prepared for the impending graduation of half of its editing staff than it actually is.

So, the question we pose to you: are you a bad enough dude to write for a hilarious biweekly satire magazine about politics, campus life, and bears? We know what concerns you might have about undertaking such an awesome venture, but we’d like to take a few moments to address the most common ones:

• What if I don’t like satire?

Okay, smartass, then why are you even reading this?

• What if I don’t know how to write satire?

Nobody expects you to. Fun fact: every member of readme was once not a member of readme. We all know what it’s like not to have any satire experience, and there’s no better way to learn than to watch other people doing it. If you’ve ever wanted to know how to express political opinions in a witty way, readme is the best place to do it. Even if you haven’t, it’s a kickass skill to have.

• What if I’m not an English major?

That’s perfectly fine. Nobody on readme is enough of a snob to make judgments about you based on what college you’re from. Leave that to the CS kids!

• What if I don’t have the time?

As it currently stands, our writing staff is able to crank out readmes in about six hours of serious work every two weeks. If that staff size were to double, that amount would go down to three hours every other week. And it’s not like we make you take a blood oath saying you’ll put readme above everything else CMU makes you do (the name of the demon we don’t invoke to bind your soul is named Azgaroth). If you need a break, we get that.

• But what if I don’t like hanging out with smart, funny people talking about all the hilariously horrible decisions people in the world are making while listening to quirky hipster music and eating from the enormous cache of candy inside AB office where we hold office hours?

Well, then you can just go fuck yourself, you tool.

If you’re not a tool, our weekly meetings are at 6:30 in UC 306 and we hold office hours on Sunday and Monday nights in the AB office every other week. More information can be found by joining our Facebook group or emailing our editor-in-chef (yes, that is the official title, and yes, it is awesome) at ikrislov@andrew.cmu.edu.

We’ve seen how excited people can be to see a new readme. We want to keep exciting people. Help spread the fun. Join readme.